Why I hate Civilians - A Military-member's Manifesto

My animosity is placed on comments about defending freedoms. A few years back I saw a bumper sticker that read "My son is in Iraq so you can have your freedom" I asked the guy how that was possible. What did Iraq do to jeopardize America's freedom? He couldn't answer. No one has ever been able to answer. It's time to stop this nonsense about protecting people's freedom. I believe many military personnel join with the best intentions and feel they are being productive in one manner or another. Whatever reasons you feel you are helping out your country or it's citizens it's not about freedom.

 

I agree with you part way. The veterans do not make the decision to go to war but part of the blame should go to those who join the military directly after an immoral war is being waged.
Also the old "Keeping Us Safe" doesn't fly. If anything, the direct US military involvement has made the world a less safer place.

 

“The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.”
– Thucydides

 

Well, thank you Mr. Canadian. Sorry, but I am going to ignore your little political rant and talk about reality.

Are you not aware that the US Military is considered by most to be the largest group of "First Responders" in the world? And no, I do not mean running to wars, but running to disasters.

What was the first nation to flood aid to places like Japan and Indonesia after the tsunamis wreched large parts of those countries? How often after various things like an outbreak of Ebola, or an earthquake in Central America does the news show within hours C-130s full of equipment and US military medical personnel and specialists going right towards the disaster? Or even here in the United States.

Does anybody think it is just some kind of fluke that most of the flood control system in this country was constructed and maintained by the Army Corps of Engineers? That after some internal disaster the first to rush into the area and to set up the largest and best equipped refugee centers is the US military? Yea, in 1994 I was a couple of miles from the Epicenter of the Northridge Earthquake. And my apartment was "red tagged". We had 2 camps nearby to take us in. One was by the Red Cross, the other was the National Guard. Guess which one I stayed at?

Well, the Red Cross was a bunch of tents, a couple of porta potties, and a roach coach with sandwiches. The ANG had tents and porta potties also, but it also had showers, laundry, and a full kitchen serving 3 hot meals a day. Plus the first had a couple of rent-a-cops that wandered around at night. The ANG had 5-6 acting as security 24 hours a day.

And they enforced order. Prostitution and drugs and the homeless were major problems at the Red Cross shelters, not so much at the NG ones. Dirty and stinky at the NG shelter? Go take a shower and take the clean clothes we will give you, or (*)(*)(*)(*). Guy wanting to enter the female tent and have some fun, get outta here. There was a reason why the Red Cross shelters were the first to close, nobody wanted to stay in them any longer then required. Most of the ANG ones were at capacity until the return of the winter rains pretty much forced those in safe buildings to overcome their fear and return home.

In your little rant you go on and on about freedom. Well, freedom does not matter a bit if you have no life to appreciate it. In the mid-1990's we had a rather liberal Talk Show Host on a local radio station, and one day she was on one of her typical rants about the US Military, and how it was a waste of resources and should be slashed to almost nothing. I actually called her show (something I do maybe once a decade) and reminded her that she herself the year before had talked about staying in an Army Reserve tent city after the earthquake. And how could they do such missions if they did not have the personnel and money to train and have supplies to do it?

Of course she simply turned the debate back to Iraq and the like, completely ignoring the fact that what she proposed was impossible. However, interestingly enough that "Liberal" is now well known for having done a major shift in many of her political stances. A few years later she got slapped in the face with the contradictions of many of her prior stances. Oh, she is still a Liberal, but a much more moderate one who no longer responds in a purely Pavlovian manner.

And BTW, for the last 4 years I have been in a Hospital unit. And when the next "big one" hits San Francisco, we are already tasked with setting up our hospital in Oakland, right next to a major tent city that will be constructed by the National Guard. We can do that in 24 hours and be fully operational (with 2 surgical bays, 2 ICUs and provide critical medical care for 140+ individuals).

So you can go on and on about your nebulous "freedoms" all you want, I am much more interested in protecting peoples most important "freedom", their lives.

- - - Updated - - -

Tell that to the people of Indonesia, Japan, and New Orleans.

 

I'm a baby boomer but not of the Vietnam era, many of us had Dads who were in the service in some capacity. Although my Dad wasn't career military, it was obvious his experiences played a big role in his life...and he was a combat veteran seeing direct action in the Ardennes forest in January, 1945 and being wounded by shrapnel from a German 88mm artillery shell.

I'd buy books about WW2, watch documentaries, I was absorbed in it at an early age...all because my Dad was a veteran of this era. Had I not had this direct influence I suspect I would not have wanted to later pursue military life.

Since around 1975 and the shift to an all-voluntary military, there's been a steady decline in veterans

Today 13% of U.S. adults overall are veterans, including 24% of men and 2% of women. Veteran status among men is highly related to age, moving above the majority level for those aged 65 and older. By contrast, 12% of men aged 25 to 34 are veterans.

 

Yes. I don't remember criticizing them for that. I was criticizing a comment about defending Freedoms.

Again, nothing to do with the comment I was criticizing. This is sounding like one of those people who respond to criticism of something America did bad by listing off all the good things America has done. How it must now absolve any bad things they did. Is that what you are trying to achieve?

Didn't know the military had a pissing contest with the Red Cross.

Oh good, maybe you will answer my question.

What. You didn't answer the question. My whole focal point was completely ignored. As for the talk show host. I don't have a transcript of what she exactly said so I can't respond to what she said. Do I think too much money is wasted on the military? Yes. Should it be slashed to almost nothing? Of course not.

This is not my argument.

No point to even bringing this up. You need to respond to what I said.

Those are good points but it doesn't address fighting for freedom.

I'm not the one that brought it up. I only questioned the outright lie of the statement.

I can't believe you used Indonesia and Japan as an example. Do you not remember the US involvement in the Indonesian invasion of East Timor. Hundreds of thousands of people died because of that.https://chomsky.info/199910__/
As for Japan, didn't you guys drop 2 atomic bombs on them. Were they thankful for that? I'm sure the people of New Orleans are thankful.

But I'm guessing the people of Iran. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Cambodia, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Venezuela, Cuba, Libya, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Lebanon, Grenada, Vietnam, Laos, Guatemala, Philippines, Haiti, Syria... you get the point. I don't think the people of those nation felt safer when the US military was involved.

 

Perhaps you are misunderstanding that joining the military does not equate to agreement with all foreign policy moves the US makes.

 

Wow, really? Philippines? Yea, they were much happier under the control of Spain, I am sure. Same with Cuba. Since you are so concerned with "freedoms", what freedoms were they promised under Spanish rule?

And for some reason you left out Panama. Naughty, naughty, naughty. Of course, Panama would still be part of Columbia if not for the intervention of the US.

Bosnia? WTF? You mean Bosnia-Herzegovenia, right? The nation that had it's citizens being slaughtered by the Serbs before NATO (not the US, NATO) stepped in and pushed the Serbs back out. That Bosnia, right?

Somalia, a place that was a cesspool when the UN (not the US, the UN) stepped in. And then the US stepped out and has been a 20 year syphylis sore on NE Africa, right? Yea, let me guess, that is the fault of the US too, right? Because it was part of a UN Peacekeeping effort.

Yea, same with Lebanon. Forget the French, and all of the other UN forces there (as well as the PLO). Let's blame all of that on the US. Even though they have been out for over 3 decades, and had nothing at all to do with the more recent descent into insanity.

And Syria, which the US has never been involved with.

Grenada, which was a nation which had a coup in 1979 where the Constitution was suspended. Which then had another coup (backed by the Cubans), in which the "Revolutionary Government" made such statements that anybody found on the street would be summarily executed. You mean that Grenada, which for over 30 years since that invasion has been a peaceful democracy, under a reconstituted Constitution which has been in place for over 30 years?

THIS is a perfect example of why I generally ridicule those who try to come at me as political beasts. More often then not, they really have no idea what they are talking about. They simply vomit talking points, not really understanding what they are talking about.

I mean, really, you bring up the Philippines and Grenada? Are you even aware that the current ruling party of Grenada (New National Party) is a center-right political organization, and has control not only of the equivelent of the Executive Branch, but all 15 seats in their House of Representatives? they literally swept the 2013 elections, and are trying to grow even closer to the United States. There has even been talks in recent years with discarding the East Caribbean Dollar (which is pegged with the US Dollar), and becoming a fully dollarized country.

Yea, Grenada really hates the US. Now kindly go back into your political hole.

 

I'm reminded of that song where Sam Cooke says "Don't know much about History" It was like he was singing about you. I will tackle each and every invasion and bomb dropped by the US. Let's start off with Grenada. Ahhh, the old Marxist rebels. I know that line of thinking. Any rebel who is left leaning must either be a Marxist or a Communist. How convenient to kill them all and justify it by simply labeling them Marxists or Communists. Would you like to read the real reasons for the war.

Here are some good reads. Also those students who were supposedly being held hostage. Never happened.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/25/invasion-grenadaronaldreagan.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/operation-agent-fury-the-1983-us-invasion-of-grenada/5360313

You need to stop getting your souces from American propaganda.

https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/155/25966.html

 

That is not what I said. Go back and read carefully what I'm saying.

 

More about the Students from Grenada.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/19551-us-invasion-of-grenada-a-30-year-retrospective


Really, get a grip on history. We'll discuss the other situations when you acknowledge how wrong you are on Grenada.

 

Well...remember I am a Civy! LOL!!

But I understand where you are coming from.

But you have to understand these people simply don't understand and have never really been educated to what is and has been going on.

You should see how I react when I go to these two really good restaurants....one in Northhampton Mass. home to Smith, Mt. Holyoke and Amherst Mass. home to Amherst College, U-Mass, Hampshire College and other Universities.

I sit down and there are tenured Professors and their Grad Students going on talking about things they have absolutely NO CLUE as to what they are talking about or forming opinions upon because THEY WERE NOT THERE!!!

They only read about it.

AA

 

Good writing, Mushroom.

I understand the disconnect a vet feels between civilians and those who serve or who have served. And I too have heard some stunningly ignorant statements about the military and about wars from civilians who have never served.

For now, I just wish to say this:

I served for 3 years in the Army in the 70s. I did not fight in a war or fight for our freedom.

But I served my country. I did my small part to keep her safe. I certainly don't brag about it to anyone; I've never sought to be praised for it. But ...

I completed my service when I was 22 years old. I'm 60 now. And for the past 38 years I've carried with me the satisfaction of having done it. That satisfaction is mine, and, speaking for veterans in general, it is ours. The ignorant and hateful may spew, but they can't have what we have, nor can they take it from us.

And I can't tell you how many people I've known who never served who tell me they wish they had. We will never have to feel that or say that.

If I had it to do all over again with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, I might do it differently than I did. But I would do it all over again in a heartbeat.

My two cents ...

 

It sounds like the OPer needs the rigid structure of military service to keep things as simple as possible for him.

 

We served to defend civilians' rights to sometimes make stupid remarks about the military.

And sadly, we have gotten away from the citizen/soldier society that made America great. I served with draftees who constantly complained about having to serve. But, I strongly believe we should reinstate the draft so that every American, male and female, can spend two years serving this nation in military or civilian capacities. That would quickly erase the divide between the two. It might also reduce some of the political stupidity we currently see.

As for your rant - there were some good points. But, you forget that you swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution and that means every American and everyone legally in this country.

 

What? You don't like the marketing of defending freedoms? Really a silly thing to nitpick about.

 

A very good post but a poor choice in a thread title as it shows a bias that goes against the message espoused in the OP. Perhaps try useing limiting language like "Why I hate some civilians". You did clarify early in the OP but the title starts the conversation on a negative generalization of an entire group of people.

 

But you also do not deal with those in the military with contempt. Therefore, it does not apply to you at all anyways.

Thanks Seth.

And it is interesting at how some in here respond, which is an example of why I feel such contempt.

"Poor ignorant fools" is pretty much what quite a few are saying. We are idiots, morons, fools, who are used-abused-exploited by government-corporations-flying sphagetti monster into becoming mindless killers.

Yea, if that is what they think, it should be obvious why I have little use for people like this:

Yea, whatever.

Actually, I have never forgotten that. That is why I still serve to this day.

But unless somebody dies, or somebody complains about how much the military costs, I doubt most civilians think about us at all, ever.

And I agree. However, think about this.

This is a really interesting experiment into how much some people in here actually read of a post or thread, or simply skim off of the title then go off of that.

Especially since in the very 3rd line I quite clearly said "Now understand, this is largely aimed at those civilians that deal with people like me with contempt. Military".

Well, that is pretty clear I would think. Don't treat the military with contempt, and I will more then likely not hold an individual in contempt myself.

And I would say 8 out of 10 that have expressed strongly negative comments, well, that is their general response to anything military in here anyways. I could discuss the need for the military to redesign the old P-38 (not the airplane), and some would just jump up and down and scream "MIC" or "Conspiracy", or some other such nonsense. I could even make a post that stated that we needed a new and improved P-38 to take advantages of modern technology and to bring it into the 21st century, and they would go on about how it is a waste of money and would be used to exploit the poor third world. And that it would not even matter, because China and Russia have not only more P-38s then the US has, but they have better ones.

And the real irony of this, is that I bet that just by saying that, many would read only a bit and jump right in and agree with everything I just stated, on how the development of a new and improved P-38 would be horrible for the world.

Unless I gave out now that what I am talking about is a piece of military hardware that a great many veterans (including myself) carry around every day. A can opener.



Of course, on the other side, we also have some "Military wonks" in here that would immediately scream that we should not even consider the P-38, because the P-51 was so much superior. It was bigger, so able to do more damage to a can then the P-38 could only dream of.

 

You know....I like you really get irked by those who badmouth those in the Military.

Many times they talk about a person in the Military as if that Soldier, Sailor or Airman was personally at fault for following orders.

One the U.S. Military is deployed it no longer matters whether you like policy or not....YOU BACK THE TROOPS!!

AA

 

I'm hopeless and so is politics. There is no People have the power. The system is rigged. We are all privates in the field taking orders from desk jockeys. Relax and cut the corruption and nothing else. That is all We the People have a responsibility to do.

 

Well...we actually do have a lot of power but people are just too apathetic to use it.

AA

 

And yea, that is why I pretty much ignore anybody who has the need to inject politics into everything.

Far right, Far left, radical Libertarians of all sorts, they are all the same to me. People who see everything shaded by their politics, and could not give a damn about the people themselves.

Oh, and do not forget that they whitewash everything so it comes out only how they think it should be (or how they want it seen by others).

No females in combat indeed. Yea, to bad you are several decades behind the news in that one. Women have not only gone into combat for over 25 years, they have led combat units.

But please, let me know when you want to discuss something seriously, instead of throwing around some mindless political jargon.

 

There were a great many women who served in WWII never mind now.

They are rightly advocating for such women to gain Vet benefits.

AA

 

We have had women in combat units, in combat positions since at least the Gulf War. And those women are now senior enough to be leading Battalion and Regiment-Brigade sized units. And some of them are doing exactly that.

As I have said many times already, my most respected Battalion Commander, who I would follow to this day anywhere she ordered me to go, is a female. And she was indeed a commander of a Combat unit.

In many ways when it comes to the military, I am very "Conservative". Yet not even I have made that kind of claim. Nor has Apache as far as I am aware of. We may have issues with certain positiions and jobs, but I do not think either of us has made such a blanket statement as some in here seem to imply.

 

There are a good number of "CIVILIAN" women who are and have been involved in forms of Combat for many years.

Such warfare is asymmetrical granted.

But it is warfare none the less.

AA